Recent Posts

1

Suggestion Box / Re: Can we just talk?

« Last post by Tolpuddle Martyr on Today at 07:57:21 am »

I think the 4chan meme here that's most apropos is "never reveal your power level."

But they always do, because pretending to be something you're not is just really fucking hard for alt righters who are ruled by their lizard brains and usually fuck up their carefully planned pantomimes by leaking like an uncontrolled urinator on their way back from the Guinness Brewery.

2

Suggestion Box / Re: Can we just talk?

« Last post by niam2023 on Today at 04:31:11 am »

I'd like to point out this all fits with the profile of someone trying to put his actions and opinions within a "new acceptable". He quite openly referenced a Kiwifarms trans conspiracy theory, didn't see anything wrong with it for the longest time, and only retracted when it was brought to the forum's attention much later.

He made reference to the 4Chan NPC meme...https://forums.fstdt.net/index.php?topic=8169.msg323798#msg323798 and defending Ben Shapiro and others who are part of the "alt-lite" who basically function to funnel people to the alt-right. It does not matter if people like Sargon or Shapiro have a supposedly antagonistic relationship with the alt-right - they're doing their part to send people to the alt-right by desensitizing them to alt-right ideas.

He covered for the people who disliked The Last Jedi by insisting we find if there's a legitimate reason to dislike it, when what was being discussed was the alt-right using that as their latest cause de jure.

He repeatedly brings up the drag kid as if that's a creeping issue becoming more widespread and a couple times insinuates the religious right would have a point if they talked about that - thus shifting the discussion (again).

He makes a few token left-seeming posts, but by and large his posts are directed to either covering for or defending bad actors.

He stepped in for Sandmann and that school of Trump Supporters - alleging this portrayal only existed due to journalist bias. Or as his intellectual cohorts would call it "FAKE NEWS!!!11!!"

3

Suggestion Box / Re: Can we just talk?

« Last post by davedan on Today at 02:25:23 am »

Why don't you answer the question? What part of what I said do you disagree with?

But yes I do think you're a sock that's what I keep saying. However I don't think you're a sock because your stated position is otherwise intellectually unassailable. I mean you are talking about good faith and bad faith but you can't answer a simple direct question?

And just to be clear the last time I agreed with you was the Weinstein Lawyer hoojah.

C'mon cracker, answer the question.

4

Suggestion Box / Re: Can we just talk?

« Last post by Chaos Undivided on Today at 02:10:53 am »

Really you get all of that out of this? Fuck you're better than I thought.

Seriously though this would appear to be completely in accord with 'I don't give much of a fuck about you, occasionally I even agree with you.' The example of that is more recent.

No seriously though what part of the quote do you substantively disagree with?

Why are you asking this? It's clear from the context that you posted that because you favored niam's position over mine, and when I asked him to show examples of me being a "bloviating centrist", you responded by insinuating I was a sock. So just admit you lied and stop trying to fudge the issue.

5

Politics and Government / Re: Alabama Governor Signs Abortion Ban Into Law

« Last post by DarkPhoenix on May 19, 2019, 11:29:04 pm »

BTW, in case there actually were some dipshits who were still claiming that the point of the Alabama law wasn't controlling women, you ought to check this out:

https://twitter.com/TheSemDem/status/1129974426404052995?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1129974426404052995

Yeah, when the guys drawing up this legislation realized that this would criminalize in-vitro fertilization and other situations where the eggs could be destroyed outside of the woman's body, they carved out exceptions for them; it's only murder if the fetus is killed INSIDE OF THE WOMAN'S UTERUS...

6

Suggestion Box / Re: Can we just talk?

« Last post by davedan on May 19, 2019, 06:51:41 pm »

Really you get all of that out of this? Fuck you're better than I thought.

Seriously though this would appear to be completely in accord with 'I don't give much of a fuck about you, occasionally I even agree with you.' The example of that is more recent.

No seriously though what part of the quote do you substantively disagree with?

7

Suggestion Box / Re: Can we just talk?

« Last post by Chaos Undivided on May 19, 2019, 06:39:00 pm »

No I was just wondering whether that was your best example of us disagreeing on substantive issues?

*sigh*

You know, if you'd acknowledged what you said was wrong and apologized when I proved it, I'd probably have let this slide. I might've also been willing to accept an explanation that you'd just forgotten. But your constant grasping at straws to avoid admitting you fucked up mean I can only assume you're not just a liar, but a liar without the good sense to know when he should give up and save at least some face.

So what other bullshit have you been spewing? And when are you going to address my concerns about bad faith allegations?

8

Suggestion Box / Re: Can we just talk?

« Last post by davedan on May 19, 2019, 06:15:05 pm »

No I was just wondering whether that was your best example of us disagreeing on substantive issues?

9

Suggestion Box / Re: Can we just talk?

« Last post by Chaos Undivided on May 19, 2019, 06:11:26 pm »

Ok so what part of:

"Quakers are a good example. While you may have some violent quakers, violence is not part of their ideology.  The same is true with feminists. There is nothing inherently violent about their ideology. The same cannot be said about Nazis or fascists, whose ideology is inherently violent.

Also my impression was that innuendo studios was talking about the prevalence of violence as a response on the basis that Nazis are much more likely to respond violently than feminists. The fact you are going back 50 years to the attempted murder of Andy Warhol, whereas 50 people were shot (and killed) a few weeks ago by a fascist, indicate the relative threat levels."

Do you disagree with cracker.

Quit trying to shift the discussion. I quoted that to prove that you have disagreed with me on substantive issues, and therefore this defense:

I haven't been having any arguments with you cracker. So that kind of does away with my motivation.

was based on a lie. The longer you delay addressing the fact that you lied, the worse it makes you look.

10

Suggestion Box / Re: Can we just talk?

« Last post by davedan on May 19, 2019, 06:03:15 pm »

Ok so what part of:

"Quakers are a good example. While you may have some violent quakers, violence is not part of their ideology.  The same is true with feminists. There is nothing inherently violent about their ideology. The same cannot be said about Nazis or fascists, whose ideology is inherently violent.

Also my impression was that innuendo studios was talking about the prevalence of violence as a response on the basis that Nazis are much more likely to respond violently than feminists. The fact you are going back 50 years to the attempted murder of Andy Warhol, whereas 50 people were shot (and killed) a few weeks ago by a fascist, indicate the relative threat levels."

Do you disagree with cracker.